Orleans County monitor. [volume] (Barton, Vt.) 1872-1953, 1887-02-14
The County Court.

The February term of court lasted
srbout ton days. no very important cases
being tried. Judge Royce, presiding
Judge, managed the court wisely ana
well. Having been disappointed in our
reporter, we acknowledge our Indebted
ness to the Express for a portion of the
facts given below:
The first case tried was between Brig
ham and Miller. The parties to this suit
were Charles O. Brigham, attorney at
Derby Line, and H. L. Miller, carriage
manufacturer at Derby Line. 1t was an
action on general assumpsit to recover
on promissory note. 1t appears that
on the first of June, 1888, Brigham swap
ped horses with Miller the difference in
the value of the horses being fixed at $40
in Brighams favor. A farther trade was
made on the same day ny which Miller
was to make one of his best buckboards
or slat wagons for Brigham, to be good
material, in a nice workmanlike manner,
to be upholstered after the style OF one
previously made for Geo. w. Bixby, to be
completed and ready for use within sixty
days Miller was also to put two or
three spokes into Brigham's buggy, put
on new tire and light coat of varnish.
In consideration Ofsall this Brigham was
to give Miller a gold watch considered to
he worth some $40; Miller wanted that
day SO in money, which Brigham gave
him, and the same was put with the $40
and was made a lien upon the horse Brig
ham delivered to Miller. The blackboard
and the specified repairs of Brigham's
wagon, made according to the written
agreement, and the payment of the $40
within sixty days, were to pay for the
watch and the note.
The Plff. put the note and contract into
the case and rested. The Deft. claimed
want of consideration in that Plf. had
not fulfilled his part of the contract.
The Deft. H. L. Miller, was the first
witness called. He said the note and
agreement were signed at the same time,
June l 1888. The horses were exchang-
ed the same day; he made one of his
best buckboards, and finished it within
notified Brigham that the blackboard was
finished and ready for use; was at his
shop, ready for him any time he called
for it. My shop was near the hotel
where Mr.. Brigham lived; had worked
10 this shop year and half Brigham
had been in my shop, knew where it was,
had had work done there. l made one of
my best wagons for Brigham; it cost 81
or So more than any | had ever made.
Defendant stated that he built a good
wagon, delivered it to plaintiff and did
according to contract.
Several witnesses testified as to the
make of the wagon and the contract.
The Plff put on witnesses to show that
the wagon was not as good as the con-
tract called for. The Plf testified that
the carriage was not equal to contract,
The case was argued by Messrs. Brig
ham and C. A. Prouty for Plff, and J. L.
Edwards and John Young for Deft. The
jury took the case and after three or
four hours deli5eration returned the
following verdict: 1.-The jury say the
Def did make and deliver to the Pin the
blackboard or Stat wagon accoI ding TO
contract. They also ind for the Pin u
recover OF the Def the sum OF sl2.25
damages and his costs. ="
The next case was Fleming VS.. VIM.
Mitchell. This action was brought to re-
cover damages for failure TO fulfil contract
1t appears that Fleming had yoke OF
bulls ia Dec 1884, and not having work
for them TO do, let Mr.. Mitchell have them
To keep through the winter and TO June
LIST following for their work. The cattle
were to be well cared for and returned
in as good condition as when taken. The
Pln claimed they were not ia as good
condition and hence brought suit for
damage.
After considerable testimony pro and
con, as TO the character OF the cattle and